[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9335-9336]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         FAIR ELECTIONS NOW ACT

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it was 8 years ago that I first introduced 
the Fair Elections Now Act. Former Senator Arlen Specter, our late 
colleague and former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was my lead 
cosponsor. We introduced the bill because we believed that America 
needs a system that rewards candidates with the best ideas and 
principles--not just the person who is the most talented in raising 
special interest money.
  I noted that day that our democracy was in trouble because special 
interests and big-donor money were choking the system and preventing us 
from facing up to the big challenges of our time. Little did I know 
that almost a decade later, this problem would have grown much worse.
  Through a series of recent cases--including the infamous Citizens 
United decision--the Supreme Court has allowed wealthy, well-connected 
campaign donors and special interests to unleash a deluge of cash in an 
effort to sway Federal, State, and local elections across our Nation. 
When it comes to understanding the influence of wealthy donors and 
special interests on Federal elections, the numbers speak for 
themselves.
  In the 2012 election cycle, candidates for both the House and Senate 
raised the majority of their funds from large donations of $1,000 or 
more. Forty percent of all contributions to Senate candidates came from 
donors who maxed out at the $2,500 contribution limit, representing 
just 0.02 percent of the American population.
  We saw this trend continue during the recent midterm elections. The 
100 biggest donors gave a combined $323 million during the 2014 
election cycle through official campaign contributions and donations to 
national party committees, PACs, Super PACs, and 527 organizations. In 
contrast to those 100 donors, an estimated 4.75 million people gave a 
comparable amount of $356 million through small-dollar donations of 
$200 or less. Astonishing as these figures are, they don't include the 
$173 million spent in the 2014 election cycle by tax-exempt ``dark 
money'' groups that are not required to publicly disclose their donors.
  Deep-pocketed special interests are aiming to control the agenda in 
Congress. It is time to fight back and fundamentally reform the way we 
finance congressional elections. We need a system that allows 
candidates to focus on constituents instead of fundraising--a system 
that encourages ordinary Americans to make their voice heard with 
small, affordable donations to the candidate of their choice.
  That is why I am once again introducing the Fair Elections Now Act. 
While this bill cannot solve all of the problems facing our Nation's 
campaign finance system, the Fair Elections Now Act will dramatically 
change the way campaigns are funded. This bill allows candidates to 
focus on the people they represent, regardless of whether those people 
have the wealth to attend a big money fundraiser or donate thousands of 
dollars.

[[Page 9336]]

  I would like to thank Sens. Baldwin, Boxer, Brown, Franken, 
Gillibrand, Heinrich, Klobuchar, Leahy, Markey, McCaskill, Menendez, 
Merkley, Murphy, Sanders, Shaheen, Udall, and Warren for cosponsoring 
the Fair Elections Now Act and joining me in this effort to reform our 
campaign finance system.
  The Fair Elections Now Act will help restore public confidence in 
congressional elections by providing qualified candidates for Congress 
with grants, matching funds, and vouchers from the Fair Elections Fund 
to replace campaign fundraising that largely relies on lobbyists, 
wealthy donors, corporations, and other special interests. In return, 
participating candidates would agree to limit their campaign spending 
to amounts raised from small-dollar donors plus the amounts provided 
from the Fair Elections Fund.
  The Fair Elections system would have three stages for Senate 
candidates. First, candidates would need to prove their viability by 
raising a minimum number and amount of small-dollar qualifying 
contributions from in-state donors. Qualified candidates would then be 
required to limit the amount raised from each donor to $150 per 
election.
  In the primary, participants would receive a base grant that would 
vary in amount based on the population of the State that the candidate 
seeks to represent. Participants would also receive a 6 to 1 match for 
small-dollar donations up to a defined matching cap. After reaching 
that cap, the candidate could raise an unlimited amount of $150 
contributions, as well as contributions from small-donor People PACs.
  In the general election, qualified candidates would receive an 
additional grant, further small-dollar matching, and vouchers for 
purchasing television advertising. The candidate could continue to 
raise an unlimited amount of $150 contributions, as well as 
contributions from small-donor People PACs.
  Under the Fair Elections Now Act, candidates would have an incentive 
to seek small donations. And citizens would have an incentive to donate 
to the candidate of their choice, knowing that their small donation of 
$150 would be converted to a $900 donation through the 6 to 1 Fair 
Elections match.
  Citizens would also be eligible for a modest, refundable tax credit. 
The Fair Elections Now Act establishes the ``My Voice Tax Credit'' to 
encourage individuals to make small donations to campaigns. Citizens 
could also make their voices heard by aggregating small contributions 
of $150 or less into a type of small-donor political action committee, 
known as a ``People PAC.'' People PACs would then be permitted to make 
campaign contributions to qualified Fair Elections candidates. Coupled 
with the Fair Elections public financing system, People PACs would 
elevate the views and interests of a diverse spectrum of Americans, 
rather than those of the traditional, wealthy donor class.
  Our country is facing major challenges. We need to continue to create 
more jobs and restore economic security for the middle class. We need 
to build and sustain our transportation infrastructure. We need to fix 
our broken immigration system. We need to ensure that the right to vote 
is protected and preserved.
  But with high-powered, special interest lobbyists fighting every 
proposal to make our country stronger, it is incredibly difficult for 
members of Congress to make progress on behalf of their constituents. 
This bill would dramatically reduce the influence of these special 
interests and wealthy donors, because Fair Elections candidates would 
not need their money to run campaigns. As a result, the bill would 
enhance the voice of average Americans. Let me be clear: the 
overwhelming majority of people serving in American politics are good, 
honest people, and I believe that most members of Congress are guided 
by the best of intentions. But we are nonetheless stuck in a terrible, 
corrupting system.
  A recent poll found bipartisan concerns about our current system. 
According to the poll, more than four out of five Americans say money 
plays too great a role in political campaigns. Two-thirds say that the 
wealthy have more of a chance to influence the electoral process than 
other Americans. The perception is that politicians are corrupted by 
big money interests . . . and whether that is true or not, that 
perception and the loss of trust that goes with it make it very 
difficult for Congress to solve tough issues.
  This problem--the perception of pervasive corruption--is undermining 
our democracy, and we must address it. Everyone is entitled to a seat 
at the table, but wealthy donors and big corporations shouldn't be able 
to buy every seat.
  The Fair Elections Now Act will reform our campaign finance system so 
that members of Congress can focus on implementing policies in the best 
interest of the people who elected them--not just the wealthy donors 
and special interests that bankrolled their success. I urge my 
colleagues and the American people to support this important 
legislation.

                          ____________________